header-logo header-logo

07 May 2021
Issue: 7932 / Categories: Legal News , ADR , Arbitration
printer mail-detail

Virtual arbitration was a success during pandemic

Arbitration retained its popularity during the COVID-19 pandemic and adapted well to the change in circumstances, according to the 2021 international arbitration survey by Queen Mary University’s School of International Arbitration, conducted in partnership with global law firm White & Case

The survey, ‘Adapting Arbitration to a Changing World’, explored how the sector adapted to the unprecedented demands of the COVID-19 pandemic. More than 1,200 private practice lawyers, in-house counsel and arbitrators took part between October 2020 and March 2021.

Some 79% of respondents said they would choose a virtual hearing over postponement if an in-person hearing were not possible, while 16% would postpone and four per cent would opt for a documents-only award.

Nine out of ten of the respondents said international arbitration was their favoured option, either on a standalone basis (31%) or in conjunction with alternative dispute resolution (59%). The top five preferred seats for arbitration were London, Singapore, Hong Kong, Paris and Geneva.

The use of technology, already widely used in international arbitration, increased during the pandemic, particularly in regard to videoconferencing and digital hearing room technologies.

Respondents liked the greater availability of potential dates for hearings, when held virtually, as well as the greater efficiency through the use of technology and greater procedural and logistical flexibility. However, they expressed concerns about the difficulty of accommodating multiple time zones and the impression that it is ‘harder for counsel teams and clients to confer’ and to control witnesses and assess their credibility. They also cited screen fatigue and the fallibility of technology as concerns.

Post-pandemic, the respondents said they would prefer a mix of in-person and virtual for almost all interactions, including meetings and conferences. Wholly virtual formats were narrowly preferred for procedural hearings, but respondents wanted to keep the option of in-person hearings open for substantive matters.

Abby Cohen Smutny, global head of the international arbitration practice group, White & Case, said: ‘The field of international arbitration is dynamic by nature.

‘Its hallmarks of flexibility and party autonomy allow it to develop and adapt in response to the needs of its users. Recent times have seen an increased focus on drivers of change such as diversity, technology, environmental considerations and information security.

‘The COVID-19 pandemic has also presented challenges to the way in which the international arbitration community interacts, with virtual hearings, conferences and meetings with counsel, clients and teams becoming the norm almost overnight.’

View the full survey report at bit.ly/3b9fahH.   

Issue: 7932 / Categories: Legal News , ADR , Arbitration
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Private wealth and tax team welcomes cross-border specialist as consultant

Freeths—Michelle Kirkland Elias

Freeths—Michelle Kirkland Elias

International hospitality and leisure specialist joins corporate team as partner

Flint Bishop—Deborah Niven

Flint Bishop—Deborah Niven

Firm appoints head of intellectual property to drive northern growth

NEWS
Talk of a reserved ‘Welsh seat’ on the Supreme Court is misplaced. In NLJ this week, Professor Graham Zellick KC explains that the Constitutional Reform Act treats ‘England and Wales’ as one jurisdiction, with no statutory Welsh slot
The government’s plan to curb jury trials has sparked ‘jury furore’. Writing in NLJ this week, David Locke, partner at Hill Dickinson, says the rationale is ‘grossly inadequate’
A year after the $1.5bn Bybit heist, crypto fraud is booming—but so is recovery. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Holloway, founder and CEO of M2 Recovery, warns that scams hit at least $14bn in 2025, fuelled by ‘pig butchering’ cons and AI deepfakes
After Woodcock confirmed no general duty to warn, debate turns to the criminal law. Writing in NLJ this week, Charles Davey of The Barrister Group urges revival of misprision or a modern equivalent
Family courts are tightening control of expert evidence. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Chris Pamplin says there is ‘no automatic right’ to call experts; attendance must be ‘necessary in the interests of justice’ under FPR Pt 25
back-to-top-scroll